scholarly journals Time course of drug-related treatment-emergent adverse side effects of brivaracetam

2020 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 107212
Author(s):  
Kimford J. Meador ◽  
Cedric Laloyaux ◽  
Sami Elmoufti ◽  
Teresa Gasalla ◽  
Jesse Fishman ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
H. H. Stassen ◽  
S. Bachmann ◽  
R. Bridler ◽  
K. Cattapan ◽  
D. Herzig ◽  
...  

AbstractCurrent treatment standards in psychiatry are oriented towards polypharmacy, that is, patients receive combinations of several antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, hypnotics, antihistamines, and anticholinergics, along with other somatic treatments. In tandem with the beneficial effects of psychopharmacological drug treatment, patients experience significant adverse reactions which appear to have become more frequent and more severe with the rise of ubiquitous polypharmacy. In this study, we aimed to assess today’s acute inpatient treatment of depressive and schizophrenic disorders with focus on therapeutic strategies, medications, adverse side effects, time course of recovery, and efficacy of treatments. Of particular interest was the weighing of the benefits and drawbacks of polypharmacy regimens. We recruited a total of 320 patients hospitalized at three residential mental health treatment centers with a diagnosis of either schizophrenic (ICD-10: “F2x.x”; n = 94; “F2 patients”) or depressive disorders (ICD-10: “F3x.x”; n = 226; “F3 patients”). The study protocol included (1) assessment of previous history by means of the SADS Syndrome Check List SSCL-16 (lifetime version); (2) repeated measurements over 5 weeks assessing the time course of improvement by the Hamilton Depression Scale HAM-D and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale PANSS, along with medications and adverse side effects through the Medication and Side Effects Inventory MEDIS; and (3) the collection of blood samples from which DNA and serum were extracted. Polypharmacy was by far the most common treatment regimen (85%) in this study. On average, patients received 4.50 ± 2.68 medications, consisting of 3.30 ± 1.84 psychotropic drugs, plus 0.79 ± 1.13 medications that alleviate adverse side effects, plus 0.41 ± 0.89 other somatic medications. The treating psychiatrists appeared to be the main determining factor in this context, while «previous history» and «severity at baseline» played a minor role, if at all. Adverse drug reactions were found to be an inherent component of polypharmacy and tended to have a 2–3 times higher incidence compared to monotherapy. Severe adverse reactions could not be attributed to a particular drug or drug combination. Rather, the empirical data suggested that severe side effects can be triggered by virtually all combinations of drugs, provided patients have a respective vulnerability. In terms of efficacy, there were no advantages of polypharmacy over monotherapy. The results of this study underlined the fact that polypharmacy regimens are not equally suited for every patient. Specifically, such regimens appeared to have a negative impact on treatment outcome and to obfuscate the “natural” time course of recovery through a multitude of interfering factors. Evidence clearly speaks against starting just every therapeutic intervention in psychiatry with a combination of psychopharmaceuticals. We think that it is time for psychiatry to reconsider its treatment strategies, which are far too one-sidedly fixated on psychopharmacology and pay far too little attention to alternative approaches, especially in mild cases where psychotherapy without concurrent medication should still be an option. Also, regular exercises and sports can definitely be an effective therapeutic means in a considerable number of cases. General practitioners (GPs) are particularly in demand here.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Lafon-Hughes

BACKGROUND COVID-19 pandemic prompts the study of coronavirus biology and search of putative therapeutic strategies. OBJECTIVE To compare SARS-CoV-2 genome-wide structure and proteins with other coronaviruses, focusing on putative coronavirus-specific or SARS-CoV-2 specific therapeutic designs. METHODS The genome-wide structure of SARS-CoV-2 was compared to that of SARS and other coronaviruses in order to gain insights, doing a literature review through Google searches. RESULTS There are promising therapeutic alternatives. Host cell targets could be modulated to hamper viral replication, but targeting viral proteins directly would be a better therapeutic design, since fewer adverse side effects would be expected. CONCLUSIONS Therapeutic strategies (Figure 1) could include the modulation of host targets (PARPs, kinases) , competition with G-quadruplexes or nucleoside analogs to hamper RDRP. The nicest anti-CoV options include inhibitors of the conserved essential viral proteases and drugs that interfere ribosome slippage at the -1 PRF site.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yann Ehinger ◽  
Ziyang Zhang ◽  
Khanhky Phamluong ◽  
Drishti Soneja ◽  
Kevan M. Shokat ◽  
...  

AbstractAlcohol Use Disorder (AUD) affects a large portion of the population. Unfortunately, efficacious medications to treat the disease are limited. Studies in rodents suggest that mTORC1 plays a crucial role in mechanisms underlying phenotypes such as heavy alcohol intake, habit, and relapse. Thus, mTORC1 inhibitors, which are used in the clinic, are promising therapeutic agents to treat AUD. However, chronic inhibition of mTORC1 in the periphery produces undesirable side effects, which limit their potential use for the treatment of AUD. To overcome these limitations, we designed a binary drug strategy in which male mice were treated with the mTORC1 inhibitor RapaLink-1 together with a small molecule (RapaBlock) to protect mTORC1 activity in the periphery. We show that whereas RapaLink-1 administration blocked mTORC1 activation in the liver, RapaBlock abolished the inhibitory action of Rapalink-1. RapaBlock also prevented the adverse side effects produced by chronic inhibition of mTORC1. Importantly, co-administration of RapaLink-1 and RapaBlock inhibited alcohol-dependent mTORC1 activation in the nucleus accumbens and attenuated alcohol seeking and drinking.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Leira ◽  
Esteban Jove ◽  
Jose M Gonzalez-Cava ◽  
José-Luis Casteleiro-Roca ◽  
Héctor Quintián ◽  
...  

Abstract Closed-loop administration of propofol for the control of hypnosis in anesthesia has evidenced an outperformance when comparing it with manual administration in terms of drug consumption and post-operative recovery of patients. Unlike other systems, the success of this strategy lies on the availability of a feedback variable capable of quantifying the current hypnotic state of the patient. However, the appearance of anomalies during the anesthetic process may result in inaccurate actions of the automatic controller. These anomalies may come from the monitors, the syringe pumps, the actions of the surgeon or even from alterations in patients. This could produce adverse side effects that can affect the patient postoperative and reduce the safety of the patient in the operating room. Then, the use of anomaly detection techniques plays a significant role to avoid this undesirable situations. This work assesses different one-class intelligent techniques to detect anomalies in patients undergoing general anesthesia. Due to the difficulty of obtaining real data from anomaly situations, artificial outliers are generated to check the performance of each classifier. The final model presents successful performance.


1927 ◽  
Vol 23 (11) ◽  
pp. 1183-1183

The adverse side effects of salvarsan injections include bleeding from the nose, gums, kidney, lung, etc. The reason for this is the permeability of the capillary walls to red blood cells due to irritation of the central nervous system in persons who are too sensitive to salvarsan. They are caused by the permeability of the capillary walls to red blood cells, caused by irritation of the central nervous system in persons over-sensitive to salvarsan.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document